Cyr v. Reliance Standard
Plaintiff - Appellee,: LAURA A. CYR
Defendant - Appellant,: RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation
Amicus Curiae,: SECRETARY OF LABOR
Case Number: 07-56869
Filed: December 31, 2007
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
December 2, 2010 Cyr v. Reliance Standard
June 22, 2011 Summary Cyr v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co.

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
June 22, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 9023029797 Filed opinion (ALEX KOZINSKI, MARY M. SCHROEDER, STEPHEN R. REINHARDT, SIDNEY R. THOMAS, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, RAYMOND C. FISHER, MARSHA S. BERZON, RICHARD R. CLIFTON, JAY S. BYBEE, MILAN D. SMITH, JR. and N. RANDY SMITH) (Judge RRC authoring). We agreed to hear this case en banc in order to reconsider our precedent as to which parties may be sued as defendants in actions for benefits under 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(1)(B), part of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, better known as ERISA. Some of our previous decisions have indicated that only a benefit plan itself or the plan administrator of a benefit plan covered under ERISA is a proper defendant in a lawsuit under that provision. We conclude that the statute does not support that limitation, however, and that an entity other than the plan itself or the plan administrator may be sued under that statute in appropriate circumstances. We overrule our prior decisions to the contrary. To apply that decision and to resolve other issues raised in this appeal, we transfer the case back to the three-judge panel to which this case was previously assigned. (See opinion for full text). Implementing this conclusion in this case and resolving the other issues raised in this appeal does not require the participation of this en banc panel. The case is therefore transferred back to the previously assigned three-judge panel for further consideration and action consistent with this opinion. TRANSFERRED TO PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED THREE-JUDGE PANEL. [7793507] [07-56869, 08-55234]
December 2, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 920101202 Opinion
Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: Cyr v. Reliance Standard
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff - appellee,: LAURA A. CYR
Represented By: Joseph Creitz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant - appellant,: RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation
Represented By: Michael Bernard Bernacchi
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Amicus curiae,: SECRETARY OF LABOR
Represented By: Stacey Eden Elias
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?